Pump Court Tax Chat cover art

Pump Court Tax Chat

Pump Court Tax Chat

By: Pump Court Tax Chambers
Listen for free

About this listen

 Pump Court Tax Chat brings you expert analysis of key, topical tax issues from the barristers from Pump Court Tax Chambers. Whether you are a tax professional, a solicitor, accountant or interested in tax law you are in the right place. As the UK’s leading tax chambers, our team of barristers dives deep into the latest tax news, key cases and important legislative updates. From the impact of major tax changes to practical advice for navigating HMRC enquiries, insights to keep you informed and ahead of the curve. Join us every month for discussions with top tax barristers covering everything from corporate tax to personal wealth tax issues. We will keep you up to date with the latest developments and ideas. Presenter: Laura Poots Producer: Peter Shevlin A C60 Media production for Pump Court Tax Chambers https://www.pumptax.com/Copyright 2026 Pump Court Tax Chambers Economics Politics & Government
Episodes
  • S2 Ep5: Employment tax roundup

    S2 Ep5: Employment tax roundup
    Apr 13 2026
    David Yates KC and Sadiya Choudhury KC take a look a some of the latest employment tax cases and recent changes to employment tax legislation.Umbrella companies2:01 Mainpay: Mainpay was an umbrella company providing the services of various employees whose assignments were sourced by an employment agency. The employment point in the case was the nature of the "overarching contract" between Mainpay and the workers, and specifically whether this allowed Mainpay to reimburse travel and subsidence expenses without accounting for income tax and NIC. Consideration of the Readymix Concrete test. Could you argue a "single discontinuous working employment relationship"? Legislation has now made arguing for overarching contracts very difficult (s339A ITPA). Other aspects of this case are discussed in the most recent Tax Litigation Update podcast. 9:20 PPS Umbrella and VAT mini-umbrella fraud category: Elphysic being the lead case which is heading for the Supreme Court. However new legislation is coming in April 2026 which makes umbrella companies jointly and severally liable for NICs. The government is also reviewing the operation of umbrella companies more widely.SARS10:39 Saunders: stock appreciation rights (SARS) under a long term incentive plan. NB this case is currently on appeal. When an employee is promised something (like a contractual right) - is it the contractual right which is their earnings or is it the payment made later under it? Does Abbott v Philbin still hold good? Do SARS have a value in their own right? Does the employee derive realistic immediate value?IR35 legislation 21:51 Bryan Robson Ltd: payments for acting as an ambassador for Manchester United. Was it an employment contract under the hypothetical employment test? Whether all or part of the consideration was attributable to the contract allowing exploitation of image rights and, if so, was this outside IR35? Case is on its way to the UT.27:50 New offset mechanism in the tax legislation to allow payments to be offset against PAYE liabilities. Will this mean a decrease in IR35 cases?Payments in lieu of notice28:53 Rawlinson: was the payment in lieu of notice (PILON) (the employee was disabled due to cancer surgery) subject to income tax as earnings? Guidance on operation of the exception of s401/406 ITPA. Absence of express language as to the purpose of a PILON not necessarily fatal but leads to tax uncertainty.Salary sacrifice schemes35:43 Best Connection: the company set up a travel payment scheme (BSS) linked to a salary sacrifice scheme.38:20 Salary sacrifice legislation under ITPA: the new rules mean that salary sacrifice schemes are now brought within the benefits legislation with some exceptions (eg electric cars, pensions, bicycles). However, contributions about £2k will be subject to NICs from April 2029. Whilst Best Connection predates all this legislation, it is still helpful on whether something is actually a salary sacrifice scheme. There is draft legislation - National Insurance Contributions Employer Pensions Contributions Bill - and further guidance promised.Agency workers legislation41:14 Tyler Security: were the dog handling services providing "personal services"? The supervision, direction and control "SDC" test.CitationsLegislationss 338 and 339A Income Tax (Earnings & Pensions) Act 2003 (ITEPA)s16 ITEPAChapter 5, part 7 ITEPAss49 - 61 ITEPA (IR 35)Schedule 1AB ITEPAs62 ITEPAs406 ITEPAs65 ITEPAs69A and 69B ITEPANational Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions Billss44 - 47 ITEPAChapters 7 and 10 Part 2 ITEPACasesMainpay Ltd v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 1290Exchequer Solutions Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKUT 25 (TCC)Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497HMRC v Payroll & Pension Services (PPS Umbrella Company) Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 995Elphysic Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKUT 236 (TCC)Saunders v HMRC [2025] UKUT 374 (TCC)Abbott v Philbin [1961] AC 352Bridges v Hewitt [1957] 1 WLR 674 (also known as Bridges v Bearsley)Bryan Robson Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 56 (TC)Basic Broadcasting Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKUT 165 (TCC)HMRC v S&L Barnes Ltd [2024] UKUT 262 (TCC)HMRC v Professional Games Match Officials Ltd [2024] UKSC 29Atholl House Productions Ltd v HMRC [2022] EWCA Civ 501Kickabout Productions Ltd v HMRC [2022] EWCA Civ 502.Rawlinson v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 45 (TC)HMRC v Tottenham Hotspur Ltd [2017] UKUT 453 (TCC)Hasted v Horner [1995] STC 766The Best Connection Group Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 1103 (TC)Tyler Security Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1250 (TC)Producer: Peter ShevlinA pod60 production for Pump Court Tax Chambers
    Show More Show Less
    52 mins
  • S2 3p4: Tax Litigation Update

    S2 3p4: Tax Litigation Update
    Mar 23 2026

    Ben Elliott, Quinlan Windle and Sam Glover look at recent developments in litigation focusing on procedural issues such as late appeals (Medpro), burden of proof (Sintra), the jurisdiction of the tribunal, disclosure and duty of candour, use of AI in writing judgments, assessments and penalties (eg Mainpay).

    2:07 Court of Appeal judgment in Medpro (late appeals and in particular the Martland approach) – The UT can give guidance and the correct guidance in relation to late appeals is theMartland approach. Higher courts can only interfere with that guidance if there has been an error of law. Has the CA widened the grounds for appeal? Some practical points arising from the decision.

    20:50 Sintra - Court of Appeal judgment concerning burden of proof in penalty cases.

    25:33 Jurisdiction of tribunal to consider public law points – in particular the recent decision in Morrisons. How to protect the taxpayer's position with parallel judicial review proceedings and statutory appeals.

    38:30 Use of AI in writing judgments – How are the courts using AI?

    40:45 Disclosure and the duty of candour – Do HMRC have a duty of candour before the FTT? Is it the same duty as in judicial review cases? Is it only HMRC who have a duty of candour in FTT cases?

    43:40 Assessments, penalties and causation - Discussion of recent cases and principles laid down in Mainpay, Delphi and Boston Consulting Group.

    Citations

    Cases

    Medpro Healthcare Ltd & Ruppai v HMRC [2026] EWCA Civ 14, [2026] STC 253

    Martland v HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC)

    Mitchell v News Group Newspapers [2013] EWCA Civ 1537, [2014] 2 All ER 430

    Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906, [2015] 1 All ER 880

    HMRC v McCarthy & Stone [2014] UKUT 196 (TCC), [2014] STC 973

    BPP Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2017] UKSC 55, [2017] 4 All ER 756

    Perinpanathan v City of Westminster Magistrates Court [2010] EWCA Civ 40, [2010] 1 WLR 1508

    Competition & Market Authority v Flynn Pharma Ltd [2022] UKSC 14, [2023] 1 All ER 97

    Price and others v HMRC [2015] UKUT 164 (TCC)

    Carbon Six Engineering Ltd v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 177 (TC)

    HMRC v Sintra Global [2025] EWCA Civ 1661

    Henryk Zeman SP Zoo v HMRC [2021] UKUT 182 (TCC), [2021] STC 1706

    Treasures of Brazil v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 929

    Caredav Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKUT 179 (TCC)

    Chelsea Cloisters v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 205 (TC), [2025] SFTD 1105

    Morrison Supermarkets v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1542 (TC)

    R (on the application of Archer) v HMRC [2017] EWCA Civ 1962, [2018] STC 38

    R (on the application of Weis) v HMRC [2025] EWHC 2479 (Admin), [2025] STC 1659

    Cobalt Data Centre 2 LLP v HMRC [2019] UKUT 342 (TCC), [2020] STC 23

    Evans v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 01112 (TC)

    Jordi Carulla Font v HMRC [2025] EWHC 3057 (Admin), [2025] STC 1935

    Nottingham Forest Football Club v HMRC [2024] UKUT 145, [2024] STC 1105

    Delphi Derivatives v HMRC [2026] UKUT 21 (TCC), [2026] STC 292

    O'Neil & Ors v HMRC [2026] UKUT 13 (TCC), [2026] STC 199

    Boston Consulting Group v HMRC [2026] UKUT 25 (TCC), [2026] STC 105

    Lands Luo Limited v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1207 (TC)

    Jeneruhl Trading Ltd & Another v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 735 (TC)

    Legislation

    CPR rule 3.9

    Rule 28 procedure

    s29 Taxes Management Act

    s36 Taxes Management Act

    Producer: Peter Shevlin

    A pod60 production for Pump Court Tax Chambers
    Show More Show Less
    59 mins
  • S2 Ep3: VAT: Classification or Characterisation of Complex Supplies

    S2 Ep3: VAT: Classification or Characterisation of Complex Supplies
    Mar 6 2026

    Laura Poots KC and Thomas Chacko consider classification and characterisation in VAT cases.

    2:00 What is meant by classification and characterisation: when you have identified you have a single supply or a set of multiple supplies, what is that supply? And is the position completely clear following Gray & Farrar?

    2:50 The first step is identification of supply - to decide if you have a single or multiple supply - and then one looks at classification. Explanation of the two bases on which a single supply might be identified.

    4:56 Is classification the final word on how the supply will be taxed?

    Case law and what are the tests?

    7:26 Card Protection Plan (CPP) Supplies – principal-ancillary supplies and how they are classified.

    8:12 Levob Supplies - In classifying these, different courts have looked at "overarching" or "economic reality" test and the "predominant element" test.

    10:45 Gray & Farrar. Court of Appeal has now confirmed that there is a hierarchy of three tests (1) predominant element (2) principal-ancillary (3) overarching supply.

    12:00 Predominance test: This is the primary test. Look at economic purpose and the typical customer (qualitative as well as quantitative).

    13:55 Principal-ancillary test: a sense check on predominance, but also useful in working out the number of elements.

    15:41 Overarching test: can assist in deciding predominance.

    17:00 In applying these tests, how do you identify the elements of the supply?

    How does this all work in practice?

    19:56 HMRC don't seem to view Gray & Farrar as settling the test in every case. What are HMRC's arguments and what are the problems with them?

    21:05 HMRC argument 1: Individual elements cannot be singled out.

    22:06 HMRC argument 2: subset of Levob supplies where no conceptual room for predominance test. HMRC's reliance on Blackrock and Deutsche Bank.

    29:19 A practical example - Story Terrace. Court takes a lot of notice of contractual documentation and marketing descriptions. Potential relevance of online reviews. Demonstration of the importance of considering identification before classification.

    CITATIONS

    Blackrock Investment Management (UK) Ltd v HMRC [2020] STC 1445

    Card Protection Plan Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners (Case C-349/96) [1999] STC 270

    Finanzamt Frankfurt am Main V-Hochst v Deutsche Bank AG (C-44/11) [2012] STC 1951

    HMRC v Gray & Farrar International LLP [2023] STC 327

    Levob Verzekeringen BV and another v Staatssecretaris van Financien (C-41/04) [2006] STC 766

    Město Žamberk v Finanční ředitelství v Hradci Králové (C-18/12) [2014] STC 1703

    Spectrum Community Health CIC v HMRC [2024] STC 1124

    Story Terrace v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 1554 (TC)

    Target Group Ltd v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 226

    Talacre Beach Caravan Sales Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners (Case C-251/05) [2006] STC 1671

    European Commission v France (Case C-94/09) [2012] STC 573

    EC v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Case C-274/15) [2017] ECR

    Producer: Peter Shevlin

    A pod60 production for Pump Court Tax Chambers
    Show More Show Less
    37 mins
No reviews yet
In the spirit of reconciliation, Audible acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.